Dean Hagerman

I think RFK would run in 68 like he did even if his brother was not assassinated.

Thats possible, but I think that crime and lawlessness would be at an all time high and america would want a drastic change

So even if RFK was not assassinated and ran in 68 Wallace would have still won

If JFK would have lived and been re-elected it is my opinion that in the 1968 election George Wallace and Curtis LeMay would have been elected president and VP

Why not just ask Judyth Baker if it is her Lee in the doorway and settle this imbroglio once and for all?

Listen to Cinque!

Now Lovelady is not stocky but fat!

He compares Lovelady and Oswald to Laruel and Hardy!

This is insanity

And I think he may have lost weight on purpose precisely to look more like Doorman. Doorman comes across as thin- much thinner than 170.

Seriously?!

So right before the HSCA and Groden want to photograph Lovelady later on in life do you think Lovelady himself said I need to look more like Doorman I better lose some weight fast!

Or do you think he was forced to lose weight by whoever was behind the cover-up?

Either way thats the most laughable theory I have ever heard

And to answer your question I have looked at these pictures years and years ago when I came to the conclusion that it was Lovelady

The way that Lovelady is standing with his left shoulder angled back makes him look thinner, but even without the way he is standing Doorman and Lovelady have the same build anyways

Doorman and Lovelady are one in the same in my opinion

Lovelady was not that stocky/chunky

You guys are making it out like Lovelady weighed 300lbs

He was not thin, and he was not stocky, I would say his build is average, just like the man in the doorway

That man is Billy Lovelady

I don't know who is in the doorway. But, I don't like the argument being advanced by Cinque. Oh, and by the

way, Jim knows me well. I weigh almost 180 lb. @ 5'10" tall in the attached picture. For reference purposes,

my daughter weighs about 110 lb. @ 5'4" tall.

Does that look "stocky" to you?

Not at all Greg, 5'10 180lbs is perfectly avarage for an adult male

Lovelady while shorter then Greg is still 10 lbs lighter

To say Lovelady is stocky/chunky is insane

Thanks for helping my post with your picture Greg

Lovelady was not that stocky/chunky

You guys are making it out like Lovelady weighed 300lbs

He was not thin, and he was not stocky, I would say his build is average, just like the man in the doorway

That man is Billy Lovelady

I dont care if JFK cheated on his wife. im sure that he did

That may make him a lousy husband, but he was still a great man and president

The problem I have with all this JFK was a sex addict talk is that it will never bring us closer to the truth about why and how JFK was assassinated

There is no way that JFKs affairs with other woman is what got him killed

The main question is: Was Lovelady in the doorway?

I believe he was.

Another question is: was the Altgens photo (Photo #6) altered?

I do not believe it was.

Altgens #6 was authentic. Not a thing was done to it. And it was transmitted rather early on the AP wire (within 35 minutes, I believe).

I also believe this issue provides an instance of the role of coincidence in this case. Lovelady, as he appears in the Altgens photo, does indeed look like Oswald. But in fact, it is not him.

That's my opinion, and I have studied that photo, and many others, for years.

Photo alteration in the JFK case is a very serious matter. I don't think Altgens 6 was altered in any way.

DSL

2/12/12; 2:20 PM

Los Angeles, CA

Great post David

I agree with you 100%

Very nice Duncan

Don't be fooled.

Dont worry your post will not fool us

We all know Jimmy D is a tireless reseacher who wants the truth

Reading your rambling post made my head hurt, how can I get that 3 minutes of my life back?

Cinque replies to Hagerman:

It was good of you to come to the aid of your pal Lamson, but he already retorted to me, point by point, and it went unanswered since I can’t join there. So, exactly how desperate are you guys if you find it necessary to double-team me? You’re sure working hard to destroy a guy whom you say is already destroyed.

To the idea that there are “cigs” or “something” in the pocket, there is no evidence of it. Here’s the pic. Point to the cigs. And if it’s something else, tell me what it is. And while you’re at it, notice that round mark in the midline of the flap. It’s what we call in the trade a “solitary, circumscribed lesion with clear margins.” And in this case, it’s a button or snap to secure that flap, which is commonly found on flannel shirts with flap pockets of this kind.

Lamson said: “the top of the pocket is the lower 1/3 of 7-8, proven by the break in the vertical line between 7-8.” Here it is large. Look at it. The only thing proven is that Lamson is being fanciful and presumptuous to the extreme.

And Lamson’s shirt test was completely invalid because it makes a big difference if a shirt is new or used, and whether it’s being worn or not. Nevertheless, you can still see that the pocket is visible in his example, and much more so than anything that can be seen on the Groden or Jackson shirts.

Hagerman, you have been mistaken for 20 years that it’s Lovelady. The question is: are you going to spend another 20 years in self-delusion?

Those are great examples Craig, it shows perfectly how a pocket can blend right in

I am beside myself right now, there is so much evidence thats its Lovelady

I have known for 20+ years that it was Lovelady, all that this thread has done has drove that point home in my head even more

Well first of all Craig is not my "pal" we disagree on almost everything, however I respect Craig and his photographic skills

So when I see something that Craig does that jumps out at me and says thats a great point and I agree with him then I will say it and back him up

In this thread what he posted was a great example, for you to ignore that means you are just lying to yourself

Did Jim happen to tell you that I am an alterationist and have backed Jim and his studies that I agree with up for years?

It just so happens that on the subject of Lovelady Craig is correct and you and Jim are wrong

It has nothing to do with whos team who is on or who believes in what, when it comes to the man in the doorway it is without question Lovelady

Cinque replies to Lamson:

This will be my last post here. I will not post again unless I am given direct access to this site. It is not fair to me--or to Dr. Fetzer--that I should have to bother him every time I want to do battle with you, Lamson. You don't have that inconvenience. So, why should I have it? And if that's how it's got to be, then I resign in protest.

I would suggest you resign, you are getting destroyed. Though I don't know how you resign from something you don't belong , but hey thats your silly logic not mine.

But in this last post, I want to point out that you, Lamson, didn't comment about the fact that both images in that collage were of Lovelady - same day, same time, same place. And yet, in one, he's got a pack of cigarettes in his pocket, and in the other there are no cigarettes but a big flap over the pocket. And any honest person-who is not determined to cling to his hopeless argument- would admit it.

But I did comment about both of them directly. Claerly the arguments are going over your head. BOTH show an open pocket filled with something (cigs?) with no flap. Its really not that hard to understand if you have the capacity for rational thought, the ability to analyse photographs and your are not trapped in a warped and losing argument.

And finally, look at this image of posing Lovelady, and look at boxes 7 and 8 as per Duncan. You say that's where the pocket is. However, there is no sign of any pocket there! And you can't tell me it's pressed down so well that the pocket's visbility is completely obliterated. If you look below that you can see wrinkles and bunching, so it's not ironed that well.

Yep the top of the pocket is the lower 1/3 of 7-8 and this is proven by the break in the vertical line between 7-8 in the Groden. Once again superior ability to analyze images trumps your somewhat limited skills.

You download this picture, and you blow it up, and you look in that area, which is pretty high up. It's smooth as a baby's bottom. There is no pocket there. That is not the shirt from 11/22, so Lovelady lied. He also lied when he said he was the Doorman. That was Oswald. And that is my last word to you.

I'm so happy its your last word, your empty posts are getting a bit tiring.

Pat Speer suggested I take some images to buttress my position. Great idea. While grocery shopping at wally world this afternoon I slipped away from my lovely wife and went to the men's department. Now we are not talking about high quality clothing here...kind of like the stuff a warehouseman might wear. (cellphone shots)

Where oh where are the pockets on these examples? And these are not really neatly pressed, just right on the hanger...

Poof! That's the last vestige of your totally unsupported set of claims blowing up in your face. Have a nice life....

Those are great examples Craig, it shows perfectly how a pocket can blend right in

I am beside myself right now, there is so much evidence thats its Lovelady

I have known for 20+ years that it was Lovelady, all that this thread has done has drove that point home in my head even more

Its Lovelady!!!!!!

As per the blown our right side, I think most of us believe there were two shots to the head: one through the right temple and one from behind. This had to result in extensive brain damage.

This is what I believe

This picture says it all

How anybody can look at this picture, then look at Altgens and say that Lovelady was NOT the man in the doorway is beyond me

It was Lovelady

Besides LHO was in the 2nd floor lunchroom during the assassination IMO

Question: did a moderator make invisible one of my posts regarding Madeleine Duncan Brown in this thread? It was a long post, goes into detail in a defense of Madeleine Brown and I would like to see it posted.

And if it was made invisible - why?

Thank-you,

Robert

That is weird, I read the post you made and was looking into the Dave Perry link that you posted

When I came back to reply to your post it was gone

I hope it was not deleted by a mod, there was nothing in that post that was against any rules

Martin I hope you were able to download "Bloody Treason" before it was deleted

The part that makes me think Stone shot the Zapruder recreation is because it shows JFK being thrown forward by the back wound

Listen to the movie and watch that scene all the way through

Costner says that this shot hit JFK in the back driving him forward and the recreation shows him being thrown forward dramaticly

Right after that we see real Zappy footage of JFK slowly moving forward

Why would Stone look for footage of JFK being thrown forward when he was hit in the back (which im sure dose not exsist, as I have seen just about every show and movie with a recreation) instead of just making his own footage?

Some of the bystanders are correct, but most in the background seem to be running or milling around

Its possible Stone shot this footage as an afterthought or in one of the run thoughs of the limo in Dealey Plaza told the JFK actor to move forward as if he had been shot

Im positive Stone shot that footage, it fits what Costner is explaining at that moment in the film

Thank you very much Barry

I just downloaded and saved to my computer Ray Marcus book "The Bastard Bullet"

I am a huge book collector and I own almost all of the old original books on the assassination, all of Jones, Weisberg, Cutler, as well as the mainstreem books, Lane, Thompson, Garrison

But I never got my hands on Rays book, some day I will purchase a copy, but for now this is great because I can read it

Thanks again

Dean,

I've got a reasonable collection of my own going on - it takes up too much space according to my wife LOL.

One book missing from my collection that's impossible to find at a good price is Bloody Treason by Noel Twyman.

Ray Marcus' book is also very difficult to track down so thanks for that, Barry!

As an FYI to folks, you can get Bloody Treason for a very reasonable $9.99 on Kindle at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Bloody-Treason-Assassination-Kennedy-ebook/dp/B0035G09FW/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1327376173&sr=1-1

Yes, I agree Bloody Treason is a fabulous book. Also, thanks, Barry.

"Texas in the Morning" by Madeleine Duncan Brown is another important, yet very hard to find book by a key mistress of Lyndon Johnson. I get asked often by people on how they can get a cheaper copy than the used ones of Amazon (last time I checked going for $80)

Robert

I am reading "Texas in the Morning" right now as we speak (thanks again Barry)

I must say I have wanted to buy this book many times, and I knew it was rare and expensive but I was going to buy it anyway, someday

Well now im reading it thanks to Barry and I must say that so far it is a great book!

I am very much enjoying it, and getting a personal look into Lyndon Johnson a well

Unlike Judyth Baker I believe Madeleine Brown 100%

When I am done I will post my thoughts

Martin I hope you were able to download "Bloody Treason" before it was deleted

Thank you very much Barry

I just downloaded and saved to my computer Ray Marcus book "The Bastard Bullet"

I am a huge book collector and I own almost all of the old original books on the assassination, all of Jones, Weisberg, Cutler, as well as the mainstreem books, Lane, Thompson, Garrison

But I never got my hands on Rays book, some day I will purchase a copy, but for now this is great because I can read it

Thanks again

Dean,

I've got a reasonable collection of my own going on - it takes up too much space according to my wife LOL.

One book missing from my collection that's impossible to find at a good price is Bloody Treason by Noel Twyman.

Ray Marcus' book is also very difficult to track down so thanks for that, Barry!

Of course "B;oody Treason" is my favorite book on the assassination, you would love it Martin, its an amazing read

I bought "Bloody Treason" from an old bookstore in Redding back in 1997 when it came out. The owner ws an older man who had to order it for me

I still remember him calling my house and leaving a message for me that the book had arrived and I could come get it

I still have it in mint condition, and I am so glad I bought it when it came out.

This bookstore owner did the same thing for me with "The Killing of a President" and "The Search for LHO" both books by Robert Groden

The other books I bought from him in the late 80s and early 90s were released and he had them stocked like Crossfire, High Treason, On the Trail of the Assassins that I was able to just walk in and buy

He was always amazed that a teenager wanted to buy every book that was released on the assassination, he was even more amazd when I told him that I had most of the books on the assassination fron the 60s and 70s handed down from my gramps

As a teenager I had a collection that I would put up aganist almost any long time researcher, I read so much as a kid that when I close my eyes now all I see is printed words

Thank you very much Barry

I just downloaded and saved to my computer Ray Marcus book "The Bastard Bullet"

I am a huge book collector and I own almost all of the old original books on the assassination, all of Jones, Weisberg, Cutler, as well as the mainstreem books, Lane, Thompson, Garrison

But I never got my hands on Rays book, some day I will purchase a copy, but for now this is great because I can read it

Thanks again

Who made that film?

KK

Oliver Stone: JFK The Movie.

If we are taking about the "Aftermath fragment" I don't think so...it appears IN Stones movie, that not automatically means, that he made it.

It could be original footage...I regard the origin of the mystery frames and the aftermath fragment as an still unanswered question.

KK

IF this are Stone recreations---

Why the hell this south side agent, in both, the myst. frames AND the aftermath fragment. That makes no sense to me. (An Idea out of the blue by Stone/Groden?: Oh lets see there is to much green in the Frames let's put some ladies and an agent on the lawn of Dealy plaza...LOL

KK

You need to listen to the movie!

Costner is saying how the Policeman smelled gunpowder and rushed acrossthe street to the knoll

Thats what this scene is showing, thats the reason that Stone recorded it, to show the policeman running across the street

Its not real footage! Just look at the people in the scene compared to the people in real footage!

Remember the blond actress that was playing a Jean Hill composit? Look at her in the red coat with blond hair! Now look at all the rest of the real footage of the real Jean Hill with brown/dark hair!

This is so simple, I cant believe you think this is not footage shot by Stone

He used old cameras and during editing him and his editors made the film look old (remember they won an Acadamy Award for film editing)

Again all this is is a scene shot by Stone to show the policeman running across the street

Watch the movie again and listen

What kills me is back in 1991 as a teenager I knew the films and photos like the back of my hand and I remember pickingout all of the footage that was shot by Stone compared to the real footage

Your un-answered question is answered, if you still think it is real footage shot in Dealey Plaza that day then I dont know what to think about you and your reasons for thinking its real

I'm glad you introduced the topic of the paranormalin teh JFK discussion. The images you present are interesting.

I also spotted ghost images elsewhere in the Zaprudar film on frames 319 - 340 but have been afraid to mention it until now, so thanks for opening the door.

I am a metaphysical scholar experienced with ghost investigations. I am also an intuitive and qualified to read and interpret paranormal phenomena. I have been called a midwife for the dead, so I am no stranger to the unusual phenomena of death and dying.

I studied the images you present with the phantom figure highlighted on the left in frame 354. This phantom with a square hairdo and strong body seems to resemble JFK's silhouette. I interpret this phantom to be the spirit of JFK, now deceased, leaving his body. That ghostly figure is free floating in the locale of his death. This is common for the newly deceased. This makes sense based on ghostly images I observed on frames 319 - 340.

Let's discuss Zapruder frames 319 - 340.

For a reference on the frames, see http://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/ Costella Combined Edit Frames (updated 2006)

Prior to frame 313 JFK is bent forward with an apparent neck wound and Jackie is consoling him. Frame 313 shows the impact of another shot hitting JFK's head. This is the mortal wound or "the kill shot". In the next few frames 319-340, JFK slumps into Jackie's lap and falls from a sitting position. Something important happens in frame 319 and 320; a small oval of white light appears next to JFK's head. The oval of white light increases to where it equals the size of JFK's head in frame 326. In fact the oval light now looks like a ghost face with eyes and mouth. But whereas JFK's head is turned to the left and slumped into Jackie's lap, The white ghost face looks out to the right toward the grassy knoll. The ghost face seems to be scanning in the direction from which the impact came. It is the involuntary action that we look when something crosses our field of awareness, and JFK's consciousness is clearly responding to the disturbance in a phantom state. His awareness is looking to see where the impact came from. Meanwhile his spirit is passing, JFK is dying in those immediate moments. On Frame 326 the ghost face is most evident and looks out toward the grassy knoll. The lighted ghost face gradually dims and shrinks in the subsequent frames and is gone by frame 340. At frame 340 JFK's body seems to stiffen and Jackie responds and changes from comforting JFK to trying to reach over the back of the limousine.

The attached picture of frame z326 clearly shows JFK's ghostly face as a white oval shaped a death mask superimposed over his slumped head, during the last moments of life in the throes of a violent and shocking death. This observation of the ghost face is based on years of cultivating special skills for reading paranormal phenomena. This is not meant to be horrific or sensational. Even to the end JFK's spirit was a bright and vivid force.

Are you joking?

If you are its not funny at all, in fact its very insulting

And if your serious then its the funniest most insane thing I have ever read

Who made that film?

KK

Oliver Stone: JFK The Movie.

Thank you Duncan!